Matthew 17:25

“`html

body { font-family: ‘Times New Roman’, serif; line-height: 1.6; max-width: 800px; margin: auto; padding: 20px; }
h1, h2, h3 { color: #333; }
blockquote { border-left: 5px solid #eee; margin: 1.5em 10px; padding: 0.5em 10px; }
b { font-weight: bold; }
i { font-style: italic; }
ul { list-style-type: disc; margin-left: 20px; }
li { margin-bottom: 5px; }

An Exegetical Study of Matthew 17:25: The Participle in Question

This exegetical study of “Participle in Matt 17:25” is based on a b-greek discussion from Thu Jul 22, 1999. The initial query focused on Matthew 17:25, specifically the grammatical parsing and case of the participle ελθοντα within the sentence: “λεγει, ναι. και ελθοντα εισ θν οικιαν προεφτασεν αυτον οιησουσ λεγων.” The original contributor questioned why this participle appeared in the accusative case, exploring possibilities such as an accusative of time or an accusative absolute, noting a lack of clear explanation in consulted grammars and observing numerous variant readings in the manuscript tradition, suggesting potential difficulties for scribes.

The main exegetical issue under consideration is the precise grammatical function and agreement of the aorist active participle, particularly its accusative case, and its relationship to other elements within Matthew 17:25. This involves evaluating whether εισελθόντα (the critically accepted form of the participle) modifies the subject or object of the main clause, understanding its temporal and circumstantial implications, and critically assessing the significance of textual variants such as the dative form found in Codex D. The inquiry necessitates a thorough grammatical analysis combined with textual critical investigation to ascertain the original intent and the most plausible translation.

Greek text (Nestle 1904):

καὶ εἰσελθόντα εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν προέφθασεν αὐτὸν ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγων

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• In the main textual reading of Matthew 17:25, the Nestle 1904 edition and the SBLGNT 2010 are identical, both presenting καὶ εἰσελθόντα εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν προέφθασεν αὐτὸν ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγων.
• However, a significant textual variant exists, as highlighted in the original discussion: Codex D (the Western text-type) reads εἰσελθόντι (dative singular participle) instead of εἰσελθόντα (accusative singular participle).

Textual Criticism (NA28) and Lexical Notes

The critical apparatus of NA28 (Nestle-Aland 28th edition), which largely informs the SBLGNT, decisively supports the reading εἰσελθόντα. This reading is attested by an overwhelming majority of primary manuscripts, including Vaticanus (B), Sinaiticus (א), Alexandrinus (A), Ephraemi Rescriptus (C), and many others representing various text-types (e.g., L W Θ 0250 f1 f13 lat syr cop). The variant εἰσελθόντι, found notably in Codex D, is considered a less probable reading by critical editors.

The preference for εἰσελθόντα is based on both external evidence (manuscript support) and internal coherence (grammatical consistency). The accusative participle εἰσελθόντα agrees in case, number, and gender with the accusative pronoun αὐτόν (referring to Peter), which functions as the object of the main verb προέφθασεν. The dative variant εἰσελθόντι in Codex D would create a grammatical incongruity, as there is no dative noun or pronoun in the immediate context for it to modify naturally. It represents a scribal alteration, possibly an attempt to connect the participle to an implied dative of interest or to the dative function that αὐτῷ might hold in other constructions, but ultimately an incorrect harmonization or simplification.

Lexically, the key terms provide important nuances:

• εἰσέρχομαι (from which εἰσελθόντα derives): BDAG defines this verb as “to go or come in, enter.” In this context, it describes Peter’s action of entering the house.
• προφθάνω (from which προέφθασεν derives): BDAG defines this as “to anticipate, forestall, precede.” This verb highlights Jesus’s divine prescience and initiative, speaking to Peter before Peter has a chance to speak or ask. The aorist tense denotes a completed action.
• λέγω (from which λέγων derives): BDAG defines this as “to say, speak, tell.” The present participle here indicates an action contemporaneous with, or immediately following, the main verb προέφθασεν, functioning adverbially to describe how Jesus anticipated Peter.

Translation Variants with Grammatical & Rhetorical Analysis

The grammatical analysis of εἰσελθόντα as an aorist active participle, masculine accusative singular, is crucial. It functions as a circumstantial participle, most naturally expressing a temporal relationship. It modifies αὐτόν (Peter), which is the accusative object of the main verb προέφθασεν. The aorist participle indicates an action completed prior to the main verb, establishing the sequence of events: Peter enters the house, and *then* Jesus anticipates him.

This construction leads to several translation possibilities, all conveying a temporal nuance:

• “When he had entered the house…” (NIV, ESV)
• “As he came into the house…” (NRSV)
• “Having come into the house…” (More literal)

The rhetorical effect of this precise sequencing is significant. Jesus’s act of anticipating Peter’s thoughts or questions upon Peter’s entry underscores Jesus’s divine knowledge and authority. It is not merely that Peter entered, but that *immediately upon his entry*, Jesus took the initiative to address the matter of the temple tax, demonstrating his awareness of Peter’s situation and his own divine insight. Had the dative variant εἰσελθόντι been the original, it would have presented a significant grammatical challenge, potentially forcing a strained interpretation (e.g., “to him who had entered the house,” if αὐτῷ were also dative, which is not the case).

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The exegetical investigation confirms that the accusative participle εἰσελθόντα in Matthew 17:25 is the critically superior reading, supported by strong manuscript evidence and sound grammatical principles. It functions as a circumstantial participle, specifying the temporal context of Jesus’s anticipatory action by describing Peter’s entry into the house. This precise grammatical structure powerfully conveys Jesus’s divine insight and sovereign initiative. The variant reading in Codex D, εἰσελθόντι, represents a scribal departure that creates grammatical discord and lacks broader textual support, making it an unlikely original reading.

Based on this analysis, the following translation suggestions capture the nuance and flow of the original Greek:

1. “When he entered the house, Jesus anticipated him by speaking…”
   This translation emphasizes the temporal priority of Peter’s entry, clearly linking it to Jesus’s immediate action.
2. “But as Peter came into the house, Jesus preempted him, saying…”
   This version uses “preempted” to highlight Jesus’s initiative and divine foresight more dynamically.
3. “And having entered the house, Jesus spoke to him before he could, saying…”
   This more literal rendering of the participle emphasizes the completed action of Peter’s entry and makes Jesus’s anticipation explicit.

“`